Ayodhya verdict

The Supreme Court on Saturday cleared the way for the construction of a Ram Temple at the
disputed site at Ayodhya, and directed the Centre to allot a 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for
building a mosque.
In one of the most important and most anticipated judgements in India’s history, a 5-judge
Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi put an end to the more than a century old
dispute that has torn the social fabric of the nation.
The apex court said the mosque should be constructed at a “prominent site” and a trust should be
formed within three months for the construction of the temple at the site many Hindus believe Lord
Ram was born.
The bench, also comprising Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul
Nazeer, said possession of the disputed 2.77 acre land rights will be handed over to the deity Ram
Lalla, who is one of the three litigants in the case. The possession however will remain with a
central government receiver.
The apex court on Saturday said the mosque should be constructed at a "prominent site" and a trust
should be formed within three months for the construction of the temple at the site many Hindus
believe Lord Ram was born. The site was occupied by the 16th century Babri mosque which was
destroyed by Hindu kar sevaks on December 6, 1992.
The bench said possession of the disputed 2.77 acre land rights will be handed over to the deity
Ram Lalla, who is one of the three litigants in the case. The possession, however, will remain with a
central government receiver. The Supreme Court said the Hindus have established their case that
they were in possession of outer courtyard and the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board has failed to
establish its case in the Ayodhya dispute.

Delivering its verdict in the politically-sensitive case of Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land
dispute in Ayodhya, the apex court directed allotment of alternative land to Muslims to build a new
mosque. The apex court said the extensive nature of Hindus worshipping at outer courtyard at the
disputed site has been there, and the evidence suggests the Muslims offered Friday prayers at
mosque which indicates that they had not lost possession of the site.

It said that despite obstruction caused in offering prayers at Mosque, the evidences suggest that
there was no abandonment in offering prayers. The apex court further said that the underlying
structure below the disputed site at Ayodhya was not an Islamic structure, but the ASI has not
established whether a temple was demolished to build a mosque.

It said that terming the archeological evidence as merely an opinion would be a great disservice to
the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). The court also said that the Hindus consider the disputed
site as the birthplace of Lord Ram and even Muslims say this about that place.

The faith of the Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the demolished structure is undisputed, the apex
court said. The bench said the existence of Sita Rasoi, Ram Chabutra and Bhandar grih are the
testimony of the religious fact of the place.

The apex court said however that the title cannot be established on the ground of faith and belief
and they are only indicators for deciding the dispute.